Page No.# 9/20 Principal Seat of this Court on 11.11.2021, no statement was made on behalf of Er. G. Tara that he had taken over charge of Sagalee Division on 29.10.2021 and in this regard, reference was made to the order dated 11.11.2021, wherein it was mentioned as follows: “Whereas, the learned senior counsel for the appellant submits that the writ appellant has not been relieved from his post and admittedly working in the same place. On the other hand, learned senior counsel for the respondent No.4 submits that the respondent No.4 had already joined the new place of posting on 22.10.2021”.It was also submitted that Er. G. Tara as well as Er. TT Tara were both the beneficiaries of recommendations made from time to time by the MLA (respondent no.5). Accordingly, it was submitted that not a single point raised by Er. TT Tara in WP(C) 338(AP)/2021 has been answered by the respondent including respondent no.4, i.e. Er. G. Tara. It may be mentioned that in addition to oral submissions, the learned senior counsel for Er. TT Tara had also submitted a written note of his submissions. In support of his submissions, the learned senior counsel for Er. TT Tara had placed reliance on the following cases:(i) The Partabpore Co. Ltd. Vs. Cane Commissioner of Bihar & Ors., (1969) 1 SCC 308, (ii)Union of India Vs. S.L. Abbas, (1993) 4 SCC 357, (iii)Mohd. Masood Ahmad Vs. State of U.P. & Ors., (2007) 8 SCC 150, (iv)Siemens Aktiengeselischaft & S. Ltd. Vs. DMRC Ltd. & Ors., (2014) 11 SCC 288, (v)Dolang Akom Vs. State of Arunachal Pradesh, 2016 (3) GLT 404, (vi)Hibu Tama Vs. State of Arunachal Pradesh, 2020 (4) GLT 503.
